Month: February 2015

So I’m sitting around thinking about the vote in Helena tomorrow, and being part of such votes when I was in the legislature, and watching the board light up, green and red, and how close it was, and how close to 51 you were.  And sometimes there’s a bit of drama, when you’re stuck at 50, and just a few haven’t voted.  Who will give you that 51st vote, and who won’t?  And I’m thinking about how the vote will go, and how it will break out.  And I realize, politics is like Hollywood.

Nobody knows anything

This debate in Helena tomorrow might decide the fate of the bill.  We’ll be attacked on two fronts:  the runaway, and the fear of potential cuts in state aid and social programs which might result from balancing the budget.  It’s the latter that concerns me, because it’s the one that will cost us Democrat votes.  The obvious rejoinder is that if this country goes belly up, which we are on course to do, there won’t be any money for anything, including Social Security.  In Tennessee and Louisiana this worked like a charm, other states not so well, others not at all.

I hope that debate comes first, because the runaway argument will, I think, get us Democrat votes.  It will be made by the most shrill hard right of the Republican Caucus, by people the Democrats despise.  In my dreams Rep. Ellie Hill gets up and cuts these dopes into mincemeat.  That would make an impression, and make clear to the rest of her caucus that voting with these whack jobs, against our bill, is doing them a favor they don’t deserve.

I really don’t know who will make the Bircher case.  The three we lost in committee, Bennett, Doane and Manzella, didn’t seem the type to get up and make much of a speech.  Maybe they won’t talk much at all, figuring they’ve got the votes.  It will be Matthew’s job to provoke them.  Since he’ll be laying in to the Birch Society, that should come natural.

If we get South Dakota tomorrow it’s a big deal.  Especially if Hal Wick can get on the Mark Levin Show, and Kasich is able to trumpet the news.  Not because we’ll get much coverage, which we won’t, but because we’ll be laying the groundwork for a repeat performance when we get 26, which should be in the next two weeks.  And again with 27, a week later.   And so on.  Eventually this becomes a story, a horse race political story.

The way I look at it every time we get a chance to frame the story it’s us vs. the John Birch Society. Those are the two contestants, and amending the Constitution, or not, is the prize.  It might work.

Because it’s true.

I’ll be on the Chris Griffin Show KMMS 1450 AM Bozeman at 7:00 a.m. MST, and the Michael Dukes Show KBYR 700 AM Anchorage at 7:30 a.m. AST.

It should be fun.  It’s been a while.

It will be at 1:00 p.m.  MST tomorrow, available for viewing or listening via the Montana Legislature website.  When there’s a close vote, with an uncertain outcome, a good speech can swing a vote or two.  Not in Congress, but it does happen in state legislatures.

It helps being a lawyer, like Matthew Monforton.  You’re accustomed to addressing judges, and juries.  And good lawyers, like Matthew, speak well extemporaneously, and are skilled in rebuttal.

He plans on taking on the Birch Society.  Not the individual Birchers, but the organization.  It’s fertile ground.  As I’ve argued previously, the Democrats whose votes we need have good reason to want to crush the Birch Society in Montana.  It’s a malign influence in the politics of the state.  If Montana passes an Article V Resolution, their irrelevancy will have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

So, go Matthew.  I made a few such speeches myself, back in the day.

They were fun.

Would a BBA really work?  I think it depends.  I doubt it would do much to restrain Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi.  I don’t think the whole Constitution thing means a whole lot to them.

I think Hillary’s different, partly because of Bill.  He was the last President to balance a budget, and she would want to match his record, if not exceed it.   Right now the Republican frontrunner is Jeb Bush.  If a BBA is in place, or imminent, Hillary would embrace it, and promise to implement it.  She would point out that the last President to balance the budget was a Democrat, who happens to be her husband.  He was followed in office by Jeb’s brother, a Republican, who promptly blew through the trillions in reserve that were bequeathed to him by his predecessor.

So if it’s Clinton v. Bush, advantage Clinton on balancing the budget.  At least in historical, Presidential terms.  She could use the BBA to beat up Bush about his brother’s record.  What’s he going to do, admit the truth, that his brother’s a dope?

We haven’t had a lot of help from Democrats, though that may be about to change in Montana.  Once we pass this thing the Democrats will change their tune.  They would have no choice.  An Article V Amendment is the voice of the people.  In embracing it, the Democrats would neutralize one of their weaknesses  — the big spender tag.  One of the defining issues of 2016 would be how, exactly, we’re going to balance the budget in the timeline set out in the Amendment.  Hillary could talk about making the wealthy pay their fair share, and Bush would promise no new taxes.  This would have to have a positive effect on confidence in our economic future.  Another virtuous circle, as economic confidence grows, the economy grows, making it easier to actually balance the damn thing.

This is all bullshit.  I know.  Sitting around predicting how something will play out politically eighteen months from now is a fool’s game.  But it’s as plausible as any other scenario.  And it shouldn’t scare Democrats.

At least the good ones.